Guest guest Posted August 31, 2001 Report Share Posted August 31, 2001 I'm afraid this means more money will be spent on research using animals. I wish the government and researchers would stop burying their heads in the sand and start acting like rational beings. Masako http://www.asahi.com/english/politics/K2001083000508.html Private drug firms to get public cash The Asahi Shimbun The government plans to subsidize drug development to improve the global competitiveness of Japanese pharmaceutical firms, officials said. In a highly unusual example of public funds being used for clinical tests conducted mainly by pharmaceutical firms, the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry will seek 11 billion yen in next fiscal year's budget for the research subsidies. The money will go to about 60 research teams around Japan working on cancer, senile dementia, strokes and other diseases. For each research team of at least five doctors, the ministry plans to distribute about 60 million yen annually to hire data management personnel and other specialists. As most national university hospitals have very little flexibility to increase staff or budgetary outlays, the new program is designed to provide additional resources to researchers. The ministry will also ask pharmaceutical firms to make contributions to pay for meetings held by the research teams. Research subsidies will also be given to teams working with placebos in the course of clinical tests of drugs in development. In addition to monetary support, the ministry also plans to loosen restrictions on research using new chemical compounds that could be developed into new drugs. Pharmaceutical firms are now banned from providing doctors with unapproved drugs. These provisions would be revised to allow for testing as long the chemicals have been safely tested on animals, the consent of those who take the drugs is received and a research plan is submitted to authorities. The new program is designed to improve both the quality and quantity of clinical tests for new drugs. Japanese pharmaceutical firms have fallen behind in the global race to develop new drugs partly due to the low number of clinical tests conducted, analysts said. A scandal involving the skin drug Sorivudine, which led to 16 deaths in the month following its introduction in September 1993, prompted a major revision in 1997 in methods used in clinical drug tests. After those revisions, the number of tests fell from about 800 in 1995 to about 400 in 1999. Analysts said behind the rapid decline in tests are the more stringent standards for clinical tests that require the written informed consent of test participants as well as the practice of pharmaceutical firms paying universities rather than individual doctors for conducting the tests. That practice has made it difficult for the firms to find doctors willing to take part in the tests. (08/30) Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Messenger http://im. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2001 Report Share Posted August 31, 2001 Masako wrote: > I'm afraid this means more money will be spent on > research using animals. I wish the government and > researchers would stop burying their heads in the sand > and start acting like rational beings. Masako > > http://www.asahi.com/english/politics/K2001083000508.html Yes, this is what really gets to me. The debate seems to be hardly ever about whether particular research should be done - just about whether taxpayers should pay for it. And in the rare cases where there is discussion of whether it should be done, the position of the animals is never mentioned - just whether there is a downside for humans. John. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2001 Report Share Posted August 31, 2001 Hi, What really annoyed me recently was where they showed rats running around on TV and said the spinal research had shown rats with spinal injuries could regenerate cells and this could help people like Christopher Reeves (the actor from Superman who broke his back horse riding). They never say the researchers broke the rat's backs or whatever other nasty damage they did so they could experiment on them with the new technology. Its half truths or most likely spin doctoring and lies so the public won't have second thoughts about the use of donations and public monies to fund the research. Kind regards, Marguerite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.